Wednesday, March 23, 2016

Presence as Distinct from Present

“Be present” is a common admonition these days. Eckhart
Tolle became famous for his book The
Power of Now, which is about being present in the here and now. The idea is
to let go of our obsession with the past and future, neither of which actually
exist in this moment.

I just read a twist on this concept that I really like. In
the book The Spell of the
Sensuous, author David Abram writes about the difference between
‘present’ and ‘presence.’

In my mind, ‘being present’ meant that you somehow managed
to step outside the flow of time. But as I read Mr. Abram’s discussion I
realized that when you are ‘in the present’ you are, in fact, still in time.
You are in this moment of ‘now,’ and
then that now, and then that now.

Presence, on the other hand, is about just being. When you are in presence you are not aware of time at
all. You are so involved in what you are doing that time becomes meaningless.
Most of us have experienced this many times—those blissful moments of play when
you lose yourself like a child to the game, or in lovemaking that envelops you
in the sensuousness of your body, or while creating art—when you come out of
that experience of presence hours may have passed and it feels like minutes.

This is what Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi calls the experience of
‘Flow.’ (This
is a link to his TED talk on Flow.)

As I thought about this, it seemed to me that ‘present’ has
the feeling of a static state, while ‘presence’ is dynamic, is experience, is being.

Mr. Abram took this concept of presence from Martin
Heidegger and his book Time and Being.
This is a quote from Heidegger:

Obviously, time is not
nothing. Accordingly, we maintain caution and say: there is time. We become
still more cautious, and look carefully at that which shows itself as time, by
looking ahead to Being in the sense of presence, the present. However, the
present in the sense of presence differs so vastly from the present in the
sense of the now…[T]he present as presence and everything which belongs to such
a present would have to be called real time, even though there is nothing
immediately about it of time as time is usually represented in the sense of a
succession of a calculable sequence of nows.

No comments:

Post a Comment

About Me

I'm a philosopher, writer, videographer, and entrepreneur. In 2013 I've released a new book, "We Are ALL Innocent by Reason of Insanity." I'm the co-author with my husband Arthur Hancock of "The Game of God: Recovering Your True Identity.